We develop the concept of ambivalence as structurally created contradictions that are made manifest in interaction. We discuss how our reconceptualization enhances the relevance of ambivalence to sociological analyses of family ties. Ambivalence is a particularly useful concept when imbedded in a theoretical framework that views social structure as structured social relations, and individuals as actors who exercise agency as they negotiate relationships within the constraints of social structure. The strengths of conceptualizing ambivalence within this framework are illustrated with examples of caring for older family members and of balancing paid work and family responsibilities.A long-standing concern in family research generally, and about intergenerational ties in particular, is the limited development of theoretical concepts and perspectives. Assessments of research and theory related to family ties and aging have emphasized several key themes: the need for multilevel analysis that connects interactions within families to social structure and culture, the importance of viewing conflict as a central feature of social life, the need to focus on relationships and families rather than on individuals exclusive-

No abstract

ࡗ Ambivalence, Family Ties, and Doing SociologyWe are excited and encouraged by the enthusiasm that our work on ambivalence has generated. Considering the comments in confidential reviews and, now, the public responses that you have just read has been intellectually stimulating. We thank all of the reviewers for the time and effort that they spent reviewing and responding to our work, especially Sara Curran for her innovative and challenging feedback. Like our colleagues, we commend Alexis Walker for proposing this opportunity for open debate and exchange. The willingness to publish theoretical work and to foster discussion supports the goal of articles such as ours to move the understanding of family relations forward by building ideas.Clearly, we are not the first to suggest ambivalence as a useful concept in the study of family relations. However, ours is among very few attempts to develop ambivalence as a distinctly sociological concept connected to strong theoretical traditions in our discipline. Our response addresses four key issues. First, we hope to put to rest the notion that ambivalence can somehow be subsumed within the solidarity model. Then we discuss three interlocking issues related to our thinking about family relationships: assumptions about ''science,'' the distinction between theory and ideology, and views about what constitutes the ''stuff'' of sociology. We use this approach to highlight fundamental differences (and sometimes, parallels) between our views of theory, so-

Data from a multi-stage quota sample of adults aged 55 and over were used to examine the effect of parent status on three measures of subjective well-being--avowed happiness, depression, and satisfaction with life. Unlike other studies, we employed four categories of parent status: close parents, distant parents, those who chose not to have children, and those who are childless by circumstance. We found significant differences in subjective well-being between close parents and distant parents, and between close parents and the childless by circumstance but not the childless by choice. We also found important differences, by gender, in which factors predict subjective well-being.

This study examined the complexities of age relations at work. Garment workers believed that their fate was linked to ageism and that their work experience was discounted by management. Managers wanted to be rid of older workers because they commanded higher wages than younger workers. The issue was cost reduction, and age was implicated unintendedly. Still, managers seemed to use stereotypical images to discourage older workers and they did not organize work routines to facilitate the adaptation of them. Instead, they subcontracted the easy jobs, relying on the experience of the older employees for difficult work while not adapting the workplace. Theoretically, the authors argue that ageism and age discrimination can best be understood through a recognition of the importance of structured age relations and human agency.